Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HIGHFIELD II v. MUNICIPALITY UPPER ST. CLAIR (06/16/89)

decided: June 16, 1989.

HIGHFIELD II, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
THE MUNICIPALITY OF UPPER ST. CLAIR, APPELLEE



Appeal from Common Pleas Court, Allegheny County, Honorable Ralph J. Cappy, Judge.

COUNSEL

Michael R. Kelly, Walter A. Koegler, Koegler & Tomlinson, Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Robert N. Hackett, Michael L. Brenner, Robert N. Hackett & Associates, Joan P. Feldman, Mark J. Christman, Pittsburgh, for appellee.

Louden L. Campbell, Calkins & Campbell, Harrisburg, for amicus curiae, Builders Association of Metropolitan Pittsburgh.

Craig and Smith, JJ., and Narick, Senior Judge.

Author: Craig

[ 126 Pa. Commw. Page 520]

Highfield II, Inc. appeals an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County that affirmed a decision of the Board of Commissioners (board) of the Township of Upper St. Clair (township) granting final approval to Highfield's proposed office and retail development, but subject

[ 126 Pa. Commw. Page 521]

    to Highfield posting a $190,605 bond as performance security. We affirm the trial court.

In 1983, Highfield applied for approval of Phase I of a five-phase office and retail development project. The project would consist of a 21,000 square foot retail shopping center building at the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Boyce Road and Hidden Valley Drive. Section 130-23 of the Township Zoning Ordinance adopts a two-tiered procedure for application and approval of planned shopping and office centers, as set forth in the ordinance and in the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC), sections 701-712,*fn1 for planned residential development.

On November 5, 1984, the board granted tentative approval to Highfield's Phase I application, subject to three modifications and twenty-six conditions. Significantly, Condition 7 stated:

That subsequent final approvals shall be subject to the compliance with the driveway designs and any improvements to Hidden Valley Drive or Boyce Road as recommended by the township's consulting traffic engineer and determined by the township in its sole discretion and approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, in order to mitigate the traffic impacts created by the Boyce Station Mall complex on the local street. All costs of such improvements shall be paid for by the applicant. (Emphasis added.)

On December 2, 1985, the board adopted Ordinance No. 1173, which granted final approval to the Highfield project subject to the posting of a performance bond. Section ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.